|
APG accepts study, continues to
pursue Wright’s Field
By Christy Scott
The Alpine Sun
ALPINE — The new Alpine Planning Group
began the year dealing with some hot topics; the biggest of
which is certainly the issue of parkland in Alpine. The group
again took up the parks issue, voting to accept the county’s
parkland analysis, with a few alterations.
This vote will kick-start the parkland acquisition
process that has been on hold since October, when the group
decided not to accept the county’s analysis that identified two
potential park sites. The Jan. 25 vote to accept that analysis
included the addition of four sites to that list.
“We have to pursue all of these sites,” said APG parks
and recreation subcommittee chairman Brad Bailey. “We can’t take
anything off the table, this study has to be done.”
County parks believes that two properties meet the
criteria for a active park site in Alpine: The “old chicken
ranch” located on Harbison Canyon Road, adjacent to Shadow Hills
Elementary School; or the now unused Lazy A horse ranch,”
located on Alpine Boulevard at the east end of town. To this
list, the planning group voted to add a nearly 13-acre site on
Harbison Canyon, a 21-acre site west of Tavern Road, a 26-acre
site east of South Grade, and a portion of the 145 acres of
Wright’s Field.
The original concern over the county’s study had to do
with the removal of Wright’s Field from the examined sites. The
APG’s parkland priority list, submitted to the county, included
the field in a list of sites to be studied, however, at the
behest of county parks and recreation department director Rene
Bahl, it was removed.
This prompted a Nov. 29 meeting with Dianne Jacob to
discuss the park situation and ask that the county study
Wright’s Field. According to Jacob, the outcome of that meeting
was that she called a stop to county work on acquiring and
developing parkland for Alpine, until the planning group can,
“get its act together.”
Jacob said that, due to the reports from staff, the
county would not be paying for more environmental studies on
Wright’s Field.
“The planning group needs to decide whether it is going
to go ahead with the options that the county has presented, or
whether it’s going to search for its own way to fund the studies
on the field,” Jacob said.
A Jan. 25 vote by the APG, nonetheless, asks the county
for an environmental study specifically on Wright’s Field,
although Bailey acknowledged that the answer would probably be
no.
The county has stated to the group on several
occasions, that Wright’s Field is not suitable for an active
park due to environmental concerns.
“As you know, the county has previously evaluated
Wright’s Field as a potential site for park development and
determined that Wright’s Field is not suitable for the
development of an active recreation park,” reads a letter from
Bahl to the planning group dated Oct. 27. “Letters stating such
were sent to the Alpine Planning Group on Oct. 8, 2003 and July
22, 2005. Our concerns regarding the biological sensitivity of
the habitats within Wright’s Field have not changed and we do
not believe that Wright’s Field is suitable for active parkland
development.”
According to Jacob, when county staff did a simple walk
of the Wright’s Field property, “The obvious environmental
impacts could be seen visibly, without even having to get into
the deeper studies.”
Planning group member Mark Price has questioned the
environmental studies that have, or have not been done on
Wright’s Field. He argued that the most recent Environmental
Impact Report conducted was part of the golf course project
that, nearly 15 years ago, was planned for the land.
“Why don’t people want to do a real, complete study,
that would finally put all of this to rest,” Price said at the
January meeting.
He also argued that a county staffer simply walking the
field should not be a basis for environmental decisions. “Do we
want land determinations made in our community, by people just
going out there and walking the area instead of doing the proper
studies? Without having any of the real data.”
New member Linda Richards was quick to speak up on this
issue. Pulling out a three-inch file folder of papers; research
she has done on Wright’s Field; she identified reports from
several agencies about the environmental sensitivities found
there. Reports from the San Diego Natural History Museum, the
county DPLU, the California Department of Fish and Game, and the
U.S. Department of Fish and Wildlife.
“There are literally hundreds of pages here of data
about Wright’s Field — what’s out there, what’s not,” Richards
said. “It’s all available if you take the time to look through
it.”
Alpine resident Peggy Benson argued that, “It’s simply
ridiculous that this process is being held up by something as
silly as native grass… If there is such a thing as native grass,
it burned to a crisp in 1970, and then it was scraped clean by
dozers.”
According to County DPLU Chief of Land Use, Tom
Oberbauer, the county holds that the underlying environmental
issues contained in the 15-year old Environmental Impact Report
have not changed, and in fact the area is likely more impacted
with the growth that has occurred in Alpine.
Jacob said the county won’t spend money for a study of
land it doesn’t own. The responsibility for the study lies with
the party that plans to develop the land, and Jacob will not use
taxpayer dollars to fund it.
“If we want to challenge it, it’s up to us,” Barnett
said. “The county is ready to go, they’ve got willing sellers
and they’re ready to move forward with the sites they have…
They’ve found pieces of property that meet everyone’s criteria
and that don’t make anyone angry. They’re ready to move ahead on
those sites.”
High school hopes
Wright’s Field is also one of four sites the Grossmont
Union High School District is considering for an Alpine High
School. Another agenda item at the Jan. 25 meeting, put the
group’s support behind a joint-use agreement with any new school
site in Alpine.
The members unanimously agreed that if a high school is
built at Wright’s Field – or any other site in Alpine – they’d
like the community to be able to use any ball fields or pool
that the high school district might build. This sort of
joint-use agreement would allow the use of Alpine Park Land
Dedication Ordinance funds to build the park.
 E-mail
Christy Scott
|
